Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) is a service we offer sellers that lets them store their products in Amazon's fulfillment centers, and we directly pack, ship, and provide customer service for these products. Something we hope you'll especially enjoy: FBA items qualify for FREE Shipping and Amazon Prime.

Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) is a service we offer sellers that lets them store their products in Amazon's fulfillment centers, and we directly pack, ship, and provide customer service for these products. Something we hope you'll especially enjoy: FBA items qualify for FREE Shipping and Amazon Prime.

Once upon a time, liberals knew what they believed. They believed America must lead the world by persuasion, not command. And they believed that by championing freedom overseas, America itself could become more free. That liberal spirit won America's trust at the dawn of the cold war. Then it collapsed in the wake of Vietnam. Now, after 9/11, and the failed presidency of George W. Bush, America needs it back.

In this powerful and provocative book, Peter Beinart offers a new liberal vision, based on principles liberals too often forget: That America's greatness cannot simply be asserted; it must be proved. That to be good, America does not have to be pure. That American leadership is not American empire. And that liberalism cannot merely define itself against the right, but must fervently oppose the totalitarianism that blighted Europe a half century ago, and which stalks the Islamic world today.

With liberals severed from their own history, conservatives have drawn on theirs—the principles of national chauvinism and moral complacency that America once rejected. The country will reject them again, and embrace the creed that brought it greatness before. But only if liberals remember what that means. It means an unyielding hostility to totalitarianism—and a recognition that defeating it requires bringing hope to the bleakest corners of the globe. And it means understanding that democracy begins at home, in a nation that does not merely preach about justice, but becomes more just itself.

Peter Beinart's The Good Fight is a passionate rejoinder to the conservatives who have ruled Washington since 9/11. It is an intellectual lifeline for a Democratic Party lying flat on its back. And it is a call for liberals to revive the spirit that swept America, and inspired the world.

"Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress"
Is the world really falling apart? Is the ideal of progress obsolete? Cognitive scientist and public intellectual Steven Pinker urges us to step back from the gory headlines and prophecies of doom, and instead, follow the data: In seventy-five jaw-dropping graphs, Pinker shows that life, health, prosperity, safety, peace, knowledge, and happiness are on the rise. Learn more

Top customer reviews

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

In 2004, Peter Beinart wrote an article for the "The New Republic" calling on Democrats to reject the pacifists in their party - such as Michael Moore - and to toughen up in the fight against Islamist totalitarianism. Beinart was trying to rally the Democratic Party around the so-called "liberal hawks."

In the past two years much has changed. Although he is still trying to enlist Democrats in the good fight, he admits that he was wrong about Iraq in several ways. One, of course, was the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, but the other, more importantly, was the failure to realize the limits of American power and legitimacy. Borrowing from Rheinhold Niebuhr, he now believes we would do well with a little humility.

That said, Beinart still believes that liberals are uniquely equipped to fight global jihad. He supports his argument by drawing on the Cold War era and the Truman administration. Centrist liberals from the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) rejected communists and communist sympathizers at home as well as abroad. They set the Democratic Party on a centrist path and became mentors and supporters of the Truman administration. The policies of deterrence and containment advocated by Dean Acheson, George Marshall, George Kennan, and Paul Nitze served this country well up until the presidency of JFK.

In his potted history of this period, Beinart is trying to draw parallels between the fight against communist totalitarianism and today's Islamist jihad. There are, however, important differences. Osama Bin Laden is no Josef Stalin. Providing support for loosely connected cells of terrorists is much different than commanding the government of the Soviet Union and its nuclear equipped army. Moreover, demonizing communism in the 50's and 60's was one thing, but demonizing Islamist jihad, and by extension Islam, one runs the risk of inflaming a clash of civilizations that is already in danger of becoming full-blown. Even the Bush administration is tactful enough to call it simply a war on terror.

Fact of the matter is, Beinart doesn't need to draw on the Cold War era and the Truman administration. (Bush has already done that.) He should be paying more attention to Francis Fukuyama's latest book "America at the Crossroads." Fukuyama like Beinart agrees that the war on terror must be fought more agressively and more intelligently. And, if it is to be successful, it must be done multilaterally and through international institutions.

In the current chastened environment, Beinart is correct in noting that humility is in order. He tells us that when America recognizes that it too is capable of evil it will then be in a better position to determine the fates of others. This is why he believes Democrats will be better able to fight the good as opposed Republicans who believe in American infallibility and who confuse American interests with universal values. It's time to start leading more by example and consensus than by force, more by negotiation and less by confrontation. This will be the tone of the next administration whether it is Democratic or Republican.

Peter Beinart's controversial book, the Good Fight, has earned justifiable praise for arguing that Liberals--yes, the terrible "L" word--are more likely than those of different political persuasion, to win what Secretary Rumsfeld has called "the long war" against international Jihadism. He makes a compelling case that Liberals and Liberalism, what Arthur Schlesinger Jr. called the "Vital Center between communism and totalitarianism," is the only political formula that will work in this struggle.

The argument is basically that when you look at the different outlooks--Liberalism, Leftism (embodied by Michael Moore and [...]), Exceptionalism (the conservative's outlook of American purity of actions in foreign policy), and isolationism (Pat Buchanan and the John Bircher's)--Liberalism is the most suitable for the very political struggle we are now engaged in. Liberalism sees that American actions are not necessarily pure in heart, that democracy is something we have to struggle to achieve every day, both here in the US and when we promote it abroad; that working with our allies and established institutions is preferable to going it alone as a policy for legitimacy purposes, etc.

Reading this book alongside Walter Russell Mead's "Special Providence" on the various schools of thought through the history of the United States' foreign policy would be worthwhile. All in all, I believe this book earns its reputation as a controversial book. Hopefully it will spark that much needed conversation, concluding with the realization by Americans that George Bush's policies are doing more harm than good. Its time to get his party and his fellow travelers out of power. Soon.

This book provides a history of politics that may fill in some blanks for those who came of age as late as Vietnam and thereafter. Specifically, the portrayal of post-World War II politics instills an appreciation for the Democratic party that may be new for those who lean Republican and were raised on the MSM since the 1968 era.

Beinart's main thesis is that the Democratic party once demonstated a more nuanced and effective foreign policy than that of the Republicans and that it should be trusted and encouraged to take up the mantle of leadership in the current fight against the forces that threaten world peace.

The Good Fight is ( or was as it is somewhat dated now, given that Barack Obama's Presidency has replaced George W.Bush's, just as Obama's has been supplanted by that of Donald Trump's) was a cri de coeur(cry from the heart) to democratic liberals to reject the national chauvinism and moral complacency of the Right( whether classical conservatism , neo or paleo-conservatism) just as much as it rejects the moral relativism of a Left(or sections thereof) that finds "Islamophobia" more reprehensible than violent jihadism personified by the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and now Islamic State)- much like Henry Wallace's Progressive Party(and its Communist fellow travellers) found"anti-Sovietism" more off putting than the reality of Stalin's police state back in the 1940s."Make America Great Again" has been hijacked by Trump of course but that does NOT invalidate Beinart's central thesis: when America becomes "We The People" rather than selfishly follows individualism, it becomes TRULY great, whether during The Great Depression, WWII or the Cold War. "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!" was JFK's call to his his fellow citizens in his inauguration( and although it would be much mocked esp during the debacle of Vietnam and the shame and scandal of Watergate, it would STILL be a valid call). In the wake of 9/11, applications for voluntary groups such as Teach For America, AmeriCorps and even the CIA skyrocketed but unfortunately the only thing that Bush suggested Americans do is go shopping.